So either become reliant on China or fight a war Chinanwont use nukes over because they won't nuke thier own territory
United States 2024: United States Senate Dicussion Thread
- Thread starter 49ersfootball
- Start date
Eh, lets not pretend the CCP using a nuke or two against a CVBG is out of the question.
I doubt a fight over Taiwan would see strat nukes launched, but a tac nuke or two used in naval fights is not outside the realm of possibility.
Vyor
My influence grows!
You leave tiawan to them?
Goodbye to any advanced technology for the next 50 years, maybe 100 years. You killed more people than nukes ever could with that decision.
Lol China owns your bosses in the pentagon
If we fight a war with China Milley would probably deploy US troops against the US population.
Except no.
Unlike you I am actually training and getting ready for the war with China.
If China owned the Pentagon we would not be having two carrier strike groups in the Pacific.
You answer to wumaos. There is a literal Chinese Vichy puppet on the white house right now. You can big man all you want but any training you're doing is just so the Pentagon can enrich itself even more as their greedy friends manage our decline
Vyor
My influence grows!
If we fought a war with china the funny button would get pressed and oh no what happened to your large dam, china? Oh, 70% of your population died along with your government? Too bad about that...
And that's why China won't use nukes as well.
Quite bluntly, it ain't worth taking that risk. Hence why the option for leaving is there. Relocation is a viable solution.
No. There's not much unique about Taiwan (there is some stuff, seismic stability matters a ton) other than the stuff being there now. It can be rebuilt, and chances are it doesn't survive an invasion, so China gets nothing. Companies are already responding to the increased threat level and building new chip factories outside of Taiwan (Intel's building some in AZ, for example). Taiwanese companies are actually building chip factories in the US.
Look, our current policy of strategic ambiguity is helping keep Taiwan free, averting war, while also not committing us to a war.
And this method of deescalating stakes is the path I'd want to vote to have happen. It's the same reason I care about energy dependence a lot. Yes, energy independence is nice for the economy and all, but more importantly it stops Saudi Arabia grabbing the US by the short and curlies and dragging us by them into atrocities.
I'd vote for someone that I considered a neocon if they could reliably disentangle us from an awful alliance like what we got with the Saudis. I'd see it as advancing anti-warness at least somewhat, though that problem that needs more than just energy independence, but also willingness in state craft to call out their atrocities.
That's why I would vote for Kari Lake: her foreign policy barely matters (she's a governor), but if she keeps AZ attractive as a business climate, more and more chip manufacturers will build stuff there, lessening the cost to the world of a mainland invasion of Taiwan, meaning that the US is less likely to interfere, and less chance of someone dumb pressing the button.
The white house, as much as I don't like them, is not a Chinese puppet. When Biden fucked up Strategic Ambiguity, he did it in an anti-China way. If anyone, I'd say he's in the Saudi's pocket given what he did with gas prices.
If everyone acts rationally, no one presses the button. That's a mighty big if.
As for the midterms, please Trump just stay quiet about running for two more days. Just two freaking days. I don't foresee good stuff for the republicans if he does run in 2024, but I expect he will.
I attribute that to him being retarded.
No one said the puppet masters can't have buyers remorse.
Fair enough.
Oh, btw, the NH Libertarian candidate for Senate just endorsed a candidate. Huge news for the Senate race, as his support could easily sway the vote:
Oh, wait, that's right. The GOP had their chance with Bruce Fenton, but went for a war happy Smollett instead. So now the Libertarians will play spoiler. Next time nominate a pro-freedom candidate instead of another neocon.
"We should go ahead and let China take Taiwan, who needs semiconductors anyways?" is peak lolbertarian take.
The fact that China has good reason to think we'll use nukes if they invade Taiwan is arguably the one reason they haven't invaded Taiwan yet. The moment our rivals, our enemies, start to believe we don't have the will to use our nuclear deterrent, it ceases to be deterrent. And you probably don't want to find out what happens next.
This isn't at all what I said. One, as stated, I'm fine with us staying at strategic ambiguity. That's useful and doesn't kill people. I'm not fine with use being bound to defend them and thus likely cause nuclear war. And no, nukes aren't needed to keep china out of Taiwan, our Conventional forces are scary enough.
Two, I literally laid out in this post and another one how we are and could get more chip production in the US to lessen such a threat, so the idea that I was treating it as nothing is wrong.
China's nukes are scarier than our conventional forces.
We have and are continuing to invest in our own semiconductor production, which is good. But Taiwan is well ahead of us in semiconductor sophistication and production capacity, and advancing state of the art semiconductor production is hard. It's yet more lolbertarian naivete to suggest it would be ok for China to have control of Taiwan's semiconductor production.
Vyor
My influence grows!
Given 50 years, yes. Each fab takes billions upon billions to build and decades to get up and running. That's why they prefer to upgrade existing fabs rather than build new ones.
That, of course, ignores how much expertise it takes to run and build them too.
They ain't gonna nuke the factories they want to have, or what they consider their own territory. Hence why it's our conventional forces which are the scary part for them.
Taiwanese companies are literally building factories in the US. They are investing in the US, and thus no, we may very well get the advanced labs here.
On top of that, I didn't say it'd be okay or good. It'd suck, but'd suck less than nuclear war though. And this inability to understand this is another reason I don't blindly vote republican. Priorities are important, and republican senators usually don't meet my priorities for not being nuked into a fine paste.
It ain't gonna take 50 years, that's just dumb. First, technology to make chips isn't made in China or Taiwan either. That's how Trump stopped China from making an advanced chip fabrication plant by blocking sale from a Dutch company of needed parts.
Second chip manufacturers are already diversifying where they make chips.
Third, chips already don't only come from Taiwan. Yeah, it'd drive up prices and we'd have a shortage which would absolutely suck, especially of high end chips.
Fourth, the race to produce new factories would radically increase the pace they were built at, including new technology to make building new factories faster. On top of that, the factories with our tech now don't take 50 years to build either.
Sergeant Foley
Well-known member
Once again folks: LET'S STAY FOCUSED ON THE US SENATE IN THE 2022 MIDTERMS!
No bragging until everything is settled and the results are to your liking, do not count your chickens before they are hatched we wait and we see.
Circle of Willis
Well-known member
If I had told my 2012 self that the first Muslim Senator would most likely be a Republican, past-me would laugh his/my lungs out, but here we are. Who'd have guessed that the alliance between woke progressives and the followers of a religion which does not, to say the least, share their views on topics like teaching little kids about sex in-between drag queen story hours (and tend to express that disapproval in a much more, shall I say, explosive manner than even the most hard-line of contemporary Christian fundamentalists) isn't sustainable?
Not strictly a Senate thing but apparently the GOP candidate in Michigan's gubernatorial race (state with the largest concentration of Muslims in the US, in Dearborn) is getting a boost from Muslims as well, for another example of this trend. And the Trump-backed candidate running for AG in Arizona alongside Senate candidate Blake Masters & the rest of the Republican slate there, Abe Hamadeh, is a Muslim too it would seem. I'd imagine that Chami guy from the Twitter vid and the vast majority of practicing Muslims would have a lot more in common, values-wise, with a Republican trucker from the Wyoming countryside than with a progressive middle-to-upper-class Democrat city slicker, and their Bush-era alliance with the latter is only going to collapse more rapidly as the neocon grip on the GOP continues to disintegrate post-Trump.
I mean let's be real, he would destroy the constitution and replace the SCOTUS with a bunch of mullahs in two seconds if he could. Every single one of them would do that.
Now counter point: Despite that hard truth, not a damn thing he said was wrong and he's absolutely correct in being disgusted with that Jacobin tier presumptuousness.